Seeking General Guitar Recording Tips

[Roper Band]

I'm going to record an album in a pro studio (Brooklyn, NY), but I planned on saving some money by laying down the guitars, bass and keys at home. I'm not a big distortion guy (my favorite guitar tone-ists are probably Eric Clapton, Tuck Andress, George Benson, Larry Carlton and Johnny Marr), but I'd like to poll the board on a few issues as this community appears to have a limitless amount of knowledge:

-Electric Guitar, line-in or mic'd amp? I have a collection of Boss pedals that I'm comfortable with, a Korg FX board that has a great lead guitar tone, and a Roland JC-55 that I could sleep with. I usually go direct-in after my pedals (without using the amp), but I went to a conference on the Stealthpedal and it got me thinking about recording in another way. Do any of you rely on modeling software nowadays or are you still going with the 'ole reliables? Anyone using a combination of both? Is the SM57 still the go-to-mic for amps? Does anyone suggest using pedals + amp + bypass + direct-in?

-Bass, same as above? I don't have any pedals or FX for bass, but I do have a great Fender bass and a good amp. I know people tend to direct-in bass more than guitar, is that what most of you guys are doing? Is micing a bass amp something anyone is even doing? I've never been too happy with the results, but it does give a bit more pop. Would anyone recommend bass pedals or modeling effects that would help?

Thanks in advance guys, I am greatly humbled by this board and I feel arrogant even expecting a response. :Confused:

[weedywet]

okay:

I mic an amp for guitars.
ALWAYS.
and always with either a large condenser (like an 87 or UM70) or on occasion with a ribbon (a Royer or an STC 4038)

I will use modeling software at home for writing when I can't make a lot of noise.

but not an an actual record, in an actual studio, by actual choice.


Bass - always mic an amp. I prefer large speakers (like a 15), I use the same mic I use for the bass drum - RE20, SM7, or occasionally D-12, D-20
I take a DI also about 10% of the time. I often don't use it.

[David Aurora]

....I am greatly humbled by this board and I feel arrogant even expecting a response. :Confused:

Dude, fuck that. Don't be shy about participating here- ask questions, speak your mind and enjoy the forum.

With that out of the way.....


What Weedy said. Although I have no problem with using dynamics on guitar amps, quite the opposite in fact.

[Brendo]

Bass - I use the same mic I use for the bass drum

Why? What if you're recording live and don't have two of?

[weedywet]

a) any DECENT studio has two of everything, at least

b) alternatively, i use as similar as possible (e.g. RE20 in bass drum, SM7 on bass amp)

[David Aurora]

+1 on the "why?" question brendo asked. dont get me wrong, i wouldnt be surprised to find that the same mic works on both sources, but ive never thought of it as a rule of thumb.

[clarito]

Why?

+1 on the "why?" question brendo asked.

Maybe its to "bind" or "gel" them into a similar "sonic footprint" so that they mate with one another (or something like that).

Makes sense to me...

[David Aurora]

Maybe its to "bind" or "gel" them into a similar "sonic footprint" so that they mate with one another (or something like that).

Makes sense to me...

yeah it makes great theoretical sense.....BUT..... theres countless different kicks and basses out there. im sure weedy isnt implying that it works 100% of the time, but im still surprised to hear that he finds it to work the best regularly. i might try it out on the next project i do and see what happens down the chain with it

[otek]

EV RE-20s and SM-7s are both about as good as it gets for dynamic mics. I haven't recorded a single kick drum (or bass amp, or most anything) where those, or the Beyer M-88, wouldn't work. There have been numerous occasions, however, where the "specialized kick drum mics" fall short - presumably because the manufacturers go out of their way to ruin the frequency response of those mics in order to make them sound "more pro".


otek

[onze_jef]

I'm going to record an album in a pro studio (Brooklyn, NY), but I planned on saving some money by laying down the guitars, bass and keys at home.

Why not record less songs and play all instruments in the studio?

[John Eppstein]

a) any DECENT studio has two of everything, at least

b) alternatively, i use as similar as possible (e.g. RE20 in bass drum, SM7 on bass amp)

Weedy, you gotta remember, some studios just got their pants down.

[Roper Band]

Why not record less songs and play all instruments in the studio?

I have a certain number in my head. Regardless, I'm considering everything at this point so if the engineer really talks me out of it I'm sure I'll budge. I like to take a lot of time on my guitar tracks, and I feel like I have a pretty good idea of the tones I want. I realize that I'm probably going to annoy some engineers with those comments!:Wink:

Thanks for all the help though guys, that stealth pedal just looked neat. Does anyone mic the amp AND bypass directly in from the amp?

[otek]

Does anyone mic the amp AND bypass directly in from the amp?

Once in a blue moon, but rarely if ever with guitar.

On some sessions we used a great sounding Ampeg V-4 which we just used on bass as a "DI with benefits". It just seemed to fit the songs better than the passive DI I was using at the time.

I should say that I use DI on bass guitar a little more extensively than Weedy. There's a certain thing you get from the low end with a DI.

Guitars will sound beyond fizzy if you don't use some kind of speaker simulator circuit - most of which don't get that special magic of speakers pushing air. With bass, what I use from a DI is so low in frequency that it's more about getting that controlled sub content. Then I blend that with the amp sound.


otek

[weedywet]

using at the time.

I should say that I use DI on bass guitar a little more extensively than Weedy. There's a certain thing you get from the low end with a DI.

because the amp you're mic'ing has 10's?:Roll eyes:

[AxeSlash]

Firstly, with a line-out you don't get the dynamic content you would with a mic & cab. Second, I still believe there is something magical that happens with a player stood in a room with an amp, versus a player sat in a control room with a pair of phones on. The player/equipment interaction is very different.

All of that said, both approaches can be used for different things with varying degrees of success. I do find, however, that clownfucking (DI-ing guitar) usually requires more work to get something usable. There are of course exceptions - usually those times when you're specifically looking for a synthetic sort of guitar sound.

And I'm yet to hear a convincing 'emulation' of a tube amp and cabinet.

I would be gobsmacked if the likes of Mr. Carlton use any clownfucking devices. In fact I'd wager he's probably a straight-into-the-amp kinda guy, and that legendary tone is 98% in his fingers.


In terms of mics, Weedy will (as usual) disagree, but most of us still reach for a 57 on impulse when someone mentions miccing a guitar cab. Experiment with what you can, of course; various different mics will give different characters to the sound which may or may not emphasise or hide things you may or may not want. There's no 'rule' in terms of this.

Experiment a lot with mic positioning; I usually end up with the mic dead-on centre as I find it gives less comb filtery shit that I have to deal with later downstream. But you may actually WANT that comby shit (if you're a masochist)...what i would say is to keep an ear out for that phasey comb filtery bollocks, and don't be fooled by the change in broad frequency response vs the change in combiness. What I mean by this is that if you move the mic off centre, it may initially sound better due to the lower amount of that harsh high mid and top end, but you will probably have also gained a fair amount of phasey bullshit that the engineer will have to shout and scream about later. You may, however, have a cab and mic combination that gives you the opposite behaviour. No two combinations will be the same.

Are you beginning to realise the amount of work/hair pulling/sheer hatred that goes into this shit? ;)

The other thing is that you mention your "favourite guitar tonists"...that's all well and good, but if you don't actually play like those guys, you may be better off looking elsewhere for your tone inspiration. Also, don't be tempted to clone others. You are your own player; get a sound that complements YOUR PLAYING, not Eric or Larry's playing. You may already know all this, but it bears repeating.

I haven't used a combined DI + mic approach for guitar for a VERY long time. It's a very dangerous game to play in terms of phase when it comes to guitar.




Bass, however, is a different story. For bass, do both DI and mic simultaneously (i.e. not two separate takes). Engineers bat the ball back and forth a lot as to which they prefer, and most like to use a combination of the two.

What I would say is that you should take some time to ensure you actually have two USABLE sounds. Depending on the amp/cabinet/mic/mic position/a variety of other factors, you can easily end up with two unreconcilably different sounds, rather than two that complement each other. As Otek hinted at, a lot of people use the DI track for the bottom and the mic for the mid & top. Bear that in mind, but also remember that that's not a steadfast rule. Equally, for some styles (I'm avoiding the word 'genre' here to avoid inflaming more Weedargument), the balance may be tipped more one way than the other.


You've opened a large can of worms here. I would suggest that if you have the time, patience, and profanity tolerance necessary, to go through all Slippy's stuff on his radio, I suggest you do. Probably start with the Palmer box episode a) for the hilarity and b) because it relates to this thread. Bear in mind he's dealing with a thoroughly different genre of music there, but the principles still apply.

[Mixboy2105]

because the amp you're mic'ing has 10's?:Roll eyes:

Could you tell us why you prefer 15's instead of 10's, besides the obvious more low end?

[Dogbreath]

deleted cuz I seemed like a hijack.

[weedywet]

I don't like the "barky" middle 10's seem to yield.

plus I DO want the bottom end as full as possible, I can (and do) always add TOP at the amp.

I can get a 15 or even an 18 (my Vox Foundation being one of my favourite bass cabs to record) to be PLENTY, growly, Entwistle, bright if desired.

but I cant get a 10 to have that full round lowest octave beneath it

anyway... all the people who say "I cant get the bottom out of the amp" have to at least TRY a 15 instead of just ASSUMING 10's are fine because they read it somewhere.

[Mixboy2105]

You're right Weedy,

Physics alone tells us that a larger diameter speaker will reproduce the low-lows easier than a smaller one. So often I read in magazines and Internet about players preferring 10's because it "projects" better. It's repeated again and again that I think most people, even me have taken it to be the absolute truth.

[kats]

You're right Weedy,

Physics alone tells us that a larger diameter speaker will reproduce the low-lows easier than a smaller one. So often I read in magazines and Internet about players preferring 10's because it "projects" better. It's repeated again and again that I think most people, even me have taken it to be the absolute truth.

True or not, most of the time we do not have a bass mic far back enough to record any of the said "projection"...

[daleandtheguitar]

On a slightly different note, if you can get your drums AND bass recorded at the same time, you should try it. Your beds will sound better/more cohesive for it 9 times out of 10. To be honest, if you can do it all in a professional house, do it. If you have confidence (not bravado, but real belief) in your recording abilities, take on whatever you want, but having someone engineer and track for you is like a musicians' day spa compared to the home perm waiting for you in the bedroom. Unless you're good. Are you?


D.

[weedywet]

True or not, most of the time we do not have a bass mic far back enough to record any of the said "projection"...

right!
and this applies as well to the argument that '8 10's are 80 sq inches of speaker, while 2 15's are only 30...'

that's ALSO only an argument (if it's meaningful anyway) if you mic the entire 8x10.

MOST people end up mic'ing ONE 10, or ONE 15 from an inch away

[John Eppstein]

I don't like the "barky" middle 10's seem to yield.

plus I DO want the bottom end as full as possible, I can (and do) always add TOP at the amp.

I can get a 15 or even an 18 (my Vox Foundation being one of my favourite bass cabs to record) to be PLENTY, growly, Entwistle, bright if desired.

but I cant get a 10 to have that full round lowest octave beneath it

anyway... all the people who say "I cant get the bottom out of the amp" have to at least TRY a 15 instead of just ASSUMING 10's are fine because they read it somewhere.

An Ampeg (or similar) 8x10 develops its bottom octave by acoustic coupling of the cones and that doesn't really begin to happen unless you're at least a couple of feet away from the amp, so close micing a cabinet of that type completely misses it. And 10s tend to be more responsive in the mids, anyway. There's a relationship between diameter and low frequency cutoff that is only partly overcome by acoustic coupling, even at a distance.

Also (and this is not always the case) 15s and 18s tend to have greater excursion than 10s, at least in speakers designed for musical instrument applications.

[mclights]

along with slippys stuff, this is also a good read:

http://www.mercenary.com/fltaabsmandh.html

[kats]

Here's what happens when you don't have an Ampeg B15:

http://empirerecording.ca/bass%20rig.jpg


Sounds great though. It's a home made cab that I put a 15" Altec 421b into. Bottom end for days. No need for DI.